96% is very different. The lab tested all their samples & it wasn't a match for any of them. If you're saying you don't believe them, well they were the ones that said it was 96%, so why believe that?I'm certain the whole lab leak thing was a result of that paper because they identified it being 96% similar to the bat coronavirus that they were supposedly doing gain of function work on in the Wuhan lab.
We know that sars cov 2 is 96% the same as a bat coronavirus that was found in the wild and sent to a lab. That coronavirus was in the wild mutating, that is the simplest and most likely way we got infected.
No, it's racist when you attack another country and blame them when it was a natural event. The term "wet market" probably doesn't mean what you think it does. "Media reports that fail to distinguish between all wet markets and those with live animals or wildlife, as well as insinuations of fostering wildlife smuggling, have been blamed for fueling Sinophobia related to the COVID-19 pandemic."There are still plenty of people that don't even believe it came from Wuhan though, because that would somehow be racist.
I am not entirely sure it came from the wet market in wuhan as there were some initial cases that couldn't be explained. I think wuhan may have been a secondary site, that just happened to be more identifiable.
Last edited by smf,